- Lots of space
- Implicit compression
- High Availability with multiple redundancy
The performance has meant that we reclaimed many hours in our batch window. The ease of which we ported data onto it, the fact that it does not take a lot of administration and the overall manageability of the box have improved our company.
Ability to use constraints to enforce uniqueness would be an improvement.
We got our first Netezza box in 2004 and the Pure Data in 2014 following the acquisition by IBM.
A blade failure at the commissioning stage, but the box (and predecessors) have been extremely stable and provides us with lots of scalability.
Very good for this product. It was excellent when it was Netezza and that support seems to have continued with IBM.
Previously used DB2 LUW but this could not provide us with the performance we needed at the time. We looked at Netezza as they were trying to get a foothold in the UK and the portability of data and the speed with which it performed was incredible.
Very straightforward for Pure Data but the initial set-up was affected by the fact that we seemed to get a junior technician from IBM who was not as good as other engineers we have had.
Build a strong relationship with your technical account manager as you will be referring to them quite a lot. Could save many man hours in the long term.
I can't comment on the figures but needless to say it has been a resounding success for us.
IBM support is very good for this product. It has very few issues and it does exactly what it says on the tin. Check for the functional limitations of the logical database e.g there are no such thing as indexes/primary key constraints where you might want to force uniqueness.